786 cpc 41 to 104 part 2 pdf (3)

Contents 41

Land sued for to be described by metes and bounds or sketch. ............................................................ 3

Section No : 42 Plaintiff suing in a representative character must show that the character has

accrued to him. ....................................................................................................................................... 3

Section No : 43 .............................................................................................................................. 3

The plaint must show that the defendant is or claims to be interested in the subject-matter, and that

he is liable to be called upon to answer the plaintiffs demand. ............................................................. 3

Section No : 44 Exemption from bar from lapse of time to be shown. .................................................. 4

Section No : 45 Jurisdiction of court to be averred. .............................................................................. 4

Section No : 46 Subscription of plaint .............................................................................................. 4

Section No : 47 WHERE PLAINT PRESENTED TO WRONG COURT. ......................................................... 7

Section No : 48 ORDER ON REJECTION OF PLAINT. .............................................................................. 7

Section No : 49 Memorandum of documents to be endorsed on plaint. ............................................... 8

[8,20 of 1977] .......................................................................................................................................... 8

Section No : 50 PLAINTIFF TO PRODUCE WITH PLAINT DOCUMENT SUED ON. .................................... 8

Section No : 51 To annex list of other documents. ................................................................................ 9

Section No : 53 Action on lost negotiable instrument. ........................................................................... 9

CHAPTER VIII ......................................................................................................................................... 10

SECTIONS 56,57 AND 58 ....................................................................................................................... 11

Section No : 59 SERVICE - Service of summons to be by registered post. ............................... 11

Section No : 60 PERSONAL SERVICE. .................................................................................................. 12

61. Substituted service. ......................................................................................................................... 13

62 SUBSTITUTED SERVICE ..................................................................................................................... 13

Section No : 63 WHEN MORE DEFENDANTS THAN ONE, SERVICE ON EACH. ..................................... 14

SECTION NO : 64 AGENTS TO ACCEPT SERVICE; PARTNERS AND MANAGER. ...................................... 14

64a Service on agent in mortgage action. ............................................................................................ 14

Section No : 65 When defendant out of jurisdiction has manager within it. ....................................... 15

Section No : 66 Service on agent in charge of immovable property. .................................................. 15

67. Misdescription not to vitiate summons, & c. .................................................................................. 15

68 Service on defendant in jail. ............................................................................................................. 15

SECTION NO : 69 SERVICE OUT OF SRI LANKA. APPLICATION FOR, HOW MADE. ................................ 16

SECTION 74 REPAEALED ....................................................................................................................... 17

75. Requisites of answer. ...................................................................................................................... 17

76 Jurisdiction of court to be specially traversed. ................................................................................ 19

77. Rejection and amendment of answer. ............................................................................................ 19

Copy of answer to be delivered to plaintiff or his registered attorney. ............................................... 20

CHAPTER X ............................................................................................................................................ 20

OF THE REPLICATION AND FURTHER PLEADINGS ................................................................................. 20

When replication may be allowed. ....................................................................................................... 20

CHAPTER XI ........................................................................................................................................... 20

OF FIXING DAY OF TRIAL ....................................................................................................................... 20

Day of trial. ............................................................................................................................................ 20

81. A reasonable number of cases to be fixed for each day. ................................................................ 21

82. Postponement. ................................................................................................................................ 21

83. Undisposed of cases to be placed at the head of the roll............................................................... 22

CHAPTER XII .......................................................................................................................................... 22

OF THE CONSEQUENCES AND CURE (WHEN PERMISSIBLE) OF DEFAULT IN PLEADING OR APPEARING

.............................................................................................................................................................. 22

Default of defendant. ............................................................................................................................ 22

85. Procedure in ex parte trial. ............................................................................................................. 23

86. If defendant excuses his default, any order or judgment to be set aside. ..................................... 25

87. Non-appearance of Plaintiff. ........................................................................................................... 27

88. No appeal against Judgment for default but order setting aside or refusing to set aside judgment

appealable. ............................................................................................................................................ 28

89. Where two or more defendants severally liable. ........................................................................... 29

90. One of many defendants appearing, no decree for default need be passed against others. ........ 30

91 OF MOTIONS .................................................................................................................................... 30

91 A. Postponements, adjournments and extensions of time. ............................................................ 31

92. OF THE JOURNAL ............................................................................................................................. 31

93. OF AMENDMENT ............................................................................................................................. 32

94. OF DISCOVERY, INSPECTION, PRODUCTION, IMPOUNDING, AND RETURN OF DOCUMENTS ....... 34

95. Service of interrogatories. .............................................................................................................. 35

96. Cost of unreasonable interrogatories to be borne by party in fault. .............................................. 35

97. Interrogatories to company, & c. .................................................................................................... 35

98. When party may refuse to answer. ................................................................................................ 35

99. To be answered by affidavit. ........................................................................................................... 36

100. Application for further answer. .................................................................................................... 36

101. Notice to admit genuineness of Documents ................................................................................ 37

102. Order for discovery of documents. ............................................................................................... 37

103. Order for order production of documents. .................................................................................. 38

103 A State required to make discovery or give inspection of documents under certain

circumstances. ...................................................................................................................................... 38

104.Notice to produce documents for inspection. ............................................................................... 38

Land sued for to be described by metes and bounds or sketch. 41. When the claim made in the action is for some specific portion of land, or for some snare or interest in a

specific portion of land, then the portion of land must be described in the plaint so far as possible by reference

to physical metes and bounds, or by reference to a sufficient sketch, map, or plan to be appended to the

plaint, and not by name only.

DAVID v. GNANAWATHIE SLR 2000, Vol :2, : 352

GUNASEKERA v. PUNCHIMENIKE AND OTHERS SLR 2002, Vol :2, : 43

GUNASINGHE V SAMARASUNDARA SLR 2004, Vol :3, : 28

Section No : 42 Plaintiff suing in a representative character must show

that the character has accrued to him. 42. When the plaintiff sues in a representative character, the plaint should show, not only that he has an

actual existing interest in the subject-matter, but that he has taken the steps necessary to enable him to

institute an action concerning it.

Illustrations

(a) A sues as B's executor. The plaint must state that A has proved B's will.

(b) A sues as C's administrator- The plaint must state that A has taken out administration to C's estate.

Plaint must show defendant's interest and liability to be sued.

WIJESUNDARA v. WIJESUNDARA SLR 2003, Vol :1, : 374

HANIFFA v. CADER et al., NLR Vol :42, : 403

Section No : 43

The plaint must show that the defendant is or claims to be interested in the

subject-matter, and that he is liable to be called upon to answer the

plaintiffs demand.

http://www.lawlanka.com/lal/slrDetailReportView?caseId=2000SLR2V352



http://www.lawlanka.com/lal/consSelectedSection?chapterId=2001Y4V101C&sectionno=42


http://www.lawlanka.com/lal/nlrDetailReportView?caseId=NLR42V403


LAFIR v. GUNAPATHY SLR 1996, Vol :2, : 1

Section No : 44 Exemption from bar from lapse of time to be shown. 44. If the cause of action arose beyond the period ordinarily allowed by any law for instituting the action,

the plaint must show the ground upon which exemption from such law is claimed.

GNANANATHAN v. PREMAWARDANE SLR 1999, Vol :3, 301

JUANIS APPUHAMY et al. v. JUAN SILVA NLR Vol :11 157

ACHCHIKUDDY v. S.KRISHNAR et al NLR Vol :69, 520

Section No : 45 Jurisdiction of court to be averred.

45. Every plaint shall contain a statement of facts setting out the jurisdiction of the court to try arid

determine the claim in respect of which the action is brought.

BLUE DIAMONDS LIMITED v. AMSTERDAM ROTTERDAM BANK M.V. AND ANOTHER (AMRO BANK CASE)

SLR 1993, Vol :2, 249

CHITAMBARA NADAR AND ANOTHER OF COLOMBO v. ELASTO LIMITED OF BENTOTA

SLR 1994, Vol :2, 325

MARTIN SILVA AND ANOTHER v. CENTRAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANCY BUREAU AND ANOTHER

SLR 2003, Vol :2, 228

AVVA UMMAH v. CASINADER NLR Vol :24, 99

CAROLIS APPUHAMY v. PETER SINGHO et al., NLR Vol :26, : 376

DEERASOORIYA v. VANDERPOORTEN NLR Vol :63, : 226

Section No : 46 Subscription of plaint 46. (1) Every plaint presented by a registered attorney on behalf of a plaintiff shall be subscribed by such

registered attorney. In every other case in which a plaint is presented, it shall be subscribed by the plaintiff;

and his signature shall be verified by the signature of some officer authorized by the court in that behalf.

















Court may refuse to entertain plaint.

(2) Before the plaint (whether presented by the plaintiff or by a registered attorney in his behalf) is allowed

to be filed, the court may, if in its discretion it shall think fit, refuse to entertain the same for any of the

following reasons, namely:

(a) if it does not state correctly, and without prolixity, the several particulars hereinbefore required to be

specified therein;

(b) if it contains any particulars other than those so required;

(c) if it is not subscribed, or subscribed and verified, as the case may be, as hereinbefore required;

(d) if it does not disclose a cause of action;

(e) if it is not framed in accordance with section 33;

(f) if it is wrongly framed by reason of non-joinder or misjoinder of parties, or because the plaintiff has

joined causes of action which ought not to be joined in the same action;

and may return the same for amendment then and there, or within such time as may be fixed by the court,

upon such terms as to the payment of costs occasioned by the amendment as the court thinks fit;

Provided that no amendment shall be allowed which would have the effect of converting an action of one

character into an action of another and inconsistent character;

And may reject.

And provided further, that in each of the following cases, namely:-

(g) Where the relief sought is undervalued, and the plaintiff, on being required by the court to correct the

valuation within a time to be fixed by the court, fails to do so;

(h) Where the relief sought is properly valued, but the plaint is written upon paper insufficiently stamped,

and the plaintiff on being required by the court to supply the requisite stamps within a time to be fixed by

the court fails to do so;

(i) When the action appears from the statement in the plaint to be barred by any positive rule of law;

[4,79 of 1988]

(j) When the plaint having been returned for amendment within a time fixed by the court is not amended

within such time,

[4,79 of 1988]

(k) When the plaint is not accompanied by such number of summonses as there are defendants,

the plaint shall be rejected; but such rejection shall not of its own force preclude the plaintiff from

presenting a fresh plaint in respect of the same cause of action.

WIGNESWAREN v. THAMBIPILLAI SLR 1983, Vol :1, : 325

CEYLON BANK EMPLOYEES UNION v. STATE MORTGAGE INVESTMENT BANK

SLR 1983, Vol :1, : 403

WIJESINGHE v. KARUNADASA SLR 1987, Vol :2, : 179

DAYA WETHTHASINGHE v. MALA RANAWAKA SLR 1989, Vol :1, : 86

ACTALINA FONSEKA AND OTHERS v. DHARSHANI FONSEKA AND OTHERS

SLR 1989, Vol :2, : 95

DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER v. SIRISENA SLR 1990, Vol :1, : 44

UVAIS v. PUNYAWATHIE SLR 1993, Vol :2, : 46

GUNASEKERA AND ANOTHER v. ABDUL LATIFF SLR 1995, Vol :1, : 225

COLOMBO SHIPPING CO. LTD. v. CHIRAYU CLOTHING (PVT) LTD. SLR 1995, Vol :2, : 97

TRUSTEES OF TAIYABBHAI CHILDREN'S TRUST v. ATTORNEY

GENERAL

SLR 1997, Vol :2, : 341

RUBERU AND ANOTHER v. WIJESOORIYA SLR 1998, Vol :1, : 58

MUTHUCUMARANA v. WIMALARATNE AND ANOTHER SLR 1999, Vol :1, : 139

WIJERATNE AND ANOTHER v. WEERATUNGA SLR 1999, Vol :1, : 332

YOUSOOF MOHAMED AND ANOTHER v. INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK SLR 1999, Vol :3, : 278

FERNANDO v. LAKSHMAN PERERA SLR 2000, Vol :2, : 413


PERERA v GEEKIYANA SLR 2007, Vol :1, : 202

PIRAGALATHAN V SHANMUGAM SLR 2007, Vol :1, : 320

MOHIDEEN v. GNANAPRAKASAM el al. NLR Vol :14, : 33

JAYAWICKRAMA et al v. AMARASOORIYA NLR Vol :17, : 174

RATNAYAKE v. FONSEKA NLR Vol :29, : 397

ORR v. THE DISTRICT JUDGE, KALUTARA NLR Vol :49, : 204

VETHAVANAM v. RETNAM NLR Vol :60, : 20

WIJEWARDENE v. LENORA NLR Vol :60, : 457

EKANAYAKE v. EKANAYAKE NLR Vol :63, : 188





























LEBBE v. SANDANAM NLR Vol :64, : 461

DARYANANI v. EASTERN SILK EMPORIUM LTD. NLR Vol :64, : 529

WIJESINGHE v. INCORPORATED COUNCIL OF LEGAL EDUCATION NLR Vol :65, : 364

THIRUMALAY v. KULANDAVELU NLR Vol :66, : 285

SLEBERT v. NEW ASIA TRADING CO., LTD. NLR Vol :66, : 460

J.E.SENANAYAKE v. V.H.L. ANTHONISZ NLR Vol :69, : 225

RATNAM.S v. DHEEN.S.M.K NLR Vol :70, : 21

SANDANAM v. JAMALDEEN NLR Vol :71, : 145

CASSIM v. THIAGARAJAH NLR Vol :71, : 279

D. D. L. KALUARACHCHI . v. CEYLON TRANSPORT BOARD NLR Vol :76, : 173

DINORIS APPUHAMY v. SOPHIE NONA NLR Vol :77, : 188

Section No : 47 WHERE PLAINT PRESENTED TO WRONG COURT.

47. In every case where an action has been instituted in a court not having jurisdiction by reason of the

amount or value involved, or by reason of the conditions made necessary to the institution of an action in

any particular court by section 9 not being present, the plaint shall be returned to be presented to the

proper court.

LAFIR v. GUNAPATHY SLR 1996, Vol :2, : 1

WERTHELIS v. DANIEL APPUHAMY NLR Vol :12, : 196

MUDIANSE et al. v. SIRIYA et al., NLR Vol :23, : 285

CHINNADURAI v. RAJASURIYA NLR Vol :32, : 86

ARUMUGASAMY v. KATHIRKAMANPILLAI NLR Vol :68, : 506

GUNARATNE v. HAMINE NLR Vol :7, : 299

Section No : 48 ORDER ON REJECTION OF PLAINT. 48. Every order returning or rejecting a plaint shall specify the date when the plaint was presented and so

returned or rejected, the name of the person by whom it was presented and whether such person was

plaintiff or registered attorney, and the fault or defect constituting the ground of return or rejection; and

every such order shall be in writing signed by the Judge, and filed of record.


ENDORIS v. HAMINE NLR Vol :3, : 97

SLEBERT v. NEW ASIA TRADING CO., LTD. NLR Vol :66, : 460

SANDANAM v. JAMALDEEN NLR Vol :71, : 145










http://www.lawlanka.com/lal/nlrDetailReportView?caseId=NLR76V173(2)














Section No : 49 Memorandum of documents to be endorsed on

plaint.

[8,20 of 1977] 49. (1) The plaintiff shall endorse on the plaint, or annex thereto, a memorandum of the documents, if any,

which he has produced along with it; and if the plaint is admitted, shall present as many copies on

unstamped paper of the plaint as there are defendants, translated into the language of each defendant

whose language is not the language of the court; unless the court, by reason of the length of the plaint or

the number of the defendants or for any other sufficient reason, permits him to present a like number of

concise statements of the nature of the claim made, or of the relief or remedy required in the action, in

which case he shall present such statements.

(2) If the plaintiff sues or the defendant or any of the defendants is sued in a representative capacity, such

statement shall show in what capacity such plaintiff or defendant sues or is sued; and the plaintiff may by

leave of the court amend such statements so as to make them correspond with the plaint.

Such memorandum and copies or statements shall be examined by the Registrar of the court and signed by

him if he finds them correct.

Section No : 49

HAMEED v. CASSIM SLR 1996, Vol :2, : 30

SURANGI v. RODRIGO SLR 2003, Vol :3, : 35

RAJAKUMAR AND ANOTHER V HATTON NATIONAL BANK LTD

SLR 2007, Vol :2, : 1

Section No : 50 PLAINTIFF TO PRODUCE WITH PLAINT DOCUMENT

SUED ON. 50. If a plaintiff sues upon a document in his possession or power, he shall produce it in court when the

plaint is presented, and document sued shall at the same time deliver the document on or a copy thereof

to be filed with the plaint.

JAYASINGHE v. GNANAWATHIE MENIKE SLR1997, Vol :3, Page: 410

NANDAWATHIE DE SILVA v. YASAWATHIE DE SILVA NLRVol :58, Page: 97










Section No : 51 To annex list of other documents. 51. If he relies on any other documents (whether in his possession or power or not) as evidence in support

of his claim, he shall enter such documents in a list to be added or annexed to the plaint.

FAROSE AHMED VS MOHAMED AND ANOTHER SLR 2006, Vol :2, : 66

AMERASEKERA et al v. PALANIAPPA et al. NLR Vol :17, : 104

ALLIS v. BABUNHAMY ET AL., NLR Vol :2, : 198

NANDAWATHIE DE SILVA v. YASAWATHIE DE SILVA NLR Vol :58, : 97

FERNANDO v. FERNANDO NLR Vol :7, : 147

Section No : 51 AND TO STATE WHERE DOCUMENT NOT IN HIS POSSESSION IS.

52. In the case of any such document not being in his possession or power, he shall, if possible, state in

whose possession or power it is.

No decided cases found

Section No : 53 Action on lost negotiable instrument. 53. In the case of any action founded upon a bill of exchange, promissory note, cheque, or any negotiable

instrument, if it be proved that the instrument is lost, and if an indemnity be given by the plaintiff, to the

satisfaction of the court, against the claims of any other person upon such instrument, the court may make

such decree as it would have made if the plaintiff had produced the instrument in court when the plaint

was presented, and had at the same time delivered a copy of the instrument to be filed with the plaint.

RUHUNU AGRO FERTILIZER CO. LTD. v. KAPILA SLR 2000, Vol :2, : 277

JAYASENA v. DAYASENA SLR 2002, Vol :3, : 261

WHITHAM v. PICHCHE MUTTU KANKANI NLR Vol :6, : 289

Section No : 54 DOCUMENT NOT PRODUCED WITH PLAINT INADMISSIBLE

AFTERWARDS WITHOUT LEAVE.

[9,20 of 1977]

54. A document which ought to be produced in court by the plaintiff when the plaint is presented, or to be

entered in the list to be added or annexed to the plaint, and which is not produced or entered accordingly,

shall not, without the leave of the court, be received in evidence on his behalf at the hearing of the action.

ALLIS v. BABUNHAMY ET AL., NLR Vol :2, : 198














FERNANDO v. FERNANDO NLR Vol :7, : 147

CHAPTER VIII OF THE ISSUE AND SERVICE OF SUMMONS

Summons. [10,20 of 1977] [2,14 of 1997]

55.

(1) Upon the plaint being filed and the copies of concise statements required by section 49 presented, the

court shall order summons in the form No. 16 in the First Schedule to issue, signed by the Registrar of the

court, requiring the defendant to answer the plaint on or before a day to be specified in the summons, such

day, being a day not later than three months from the date of the institution of the action in court.

(2) (a) Every party to an action, not appearing by a registered attorney, shall on or before the date specified

in the summons deliver to the Registrar a memorandum substantially in the form No. 16A in the First

Schedule setting out an address (hereinafter referred to as the " registered address") for the service on him

of the notice under section 80 and any other legal document required to be served on a party under the

provisions of this Ordinance unless otherwise provided. Every party shall with such memorandum tender to

the Registrar stamps to the value required to cover cost of service of such notice by registered post.

(b) Where a party appears by a registered attorney the address of the registered attorney contained in his

appointment shall be deemed to be the registered address of such party; and such registered attorney

shall, on or before the date specified in the summons, tender to the Registrar stamps to the value required

to cover cost of service by registered post, of the notice under section 80.

(c) The dispatch by registered post to the registered address of a party of the notice under section 80, and

of any other legal document required to be served on him shall be deemed to be sufficient service.

(d) The Registrar shall keep and maintain a list of the registered addresses furnished to him under this

subsection, which list shall be filed as part of the record of the case.

Section No : 55

WIGNESWAREN v. THAMBIPILLAI SLR 1983, Vol :1, : 325

CEYLON BANK EMPLOYEES UNION v. STATE MORTGAGE INVESTMENT BANK

SLR 1983, Vol :1, : 403

DE MEL v. NETTASINGHE SLR 1993, Vol :2, : 332

LEELAWATHIE v. JAYANERIS AND OTHERS SLR 2001, Vol :2, : 231

JOYCE PERERA v. LAL PERERA SLR 2002, Vol :3, : 8









LENO HAMY et al v. NONNO et al NLR Vol :17, : 378

GOONEWARDANA v. RAJAPAKSE NLR Vol :1, : 217

COREA v. ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT AGENT NLR Vol :22, : 172

MATHER v. PERI TAMBY CHETTY NLR Vol :28, : 443

RATNASEKERA v. MILLER & CO.,LTD., NLR Vol :44, : 520

HABEBU MOHAMEDU v. LEBBE MARIKAR et al., NLR Vol :48, : 370

SECTIONS 56,57 AND 58 [Sections 56,57 and 58 are repealed by Law No. 20 of 1977]

Section No : 59 SERVICE - Service of summons to be by registered

post. [3,14 of 1997]

59.

(1) Summons shall ordinarily be served by registered post.

(2) (a) In the case of a corporation, or incorporate body summons may be delivered to the registered office

or if there is no registered office, the principal place of business of such corporation or body.

(b) Where the defendant is a public officer the court may send summons by registered post to the head of

the department in which the defendant is employed, and it shall be the duty of such head of department to

cause the summons to be served personally on the defendant.

(c) Where the court is prima facie satisfied that the defendant is in the employment of another person, the

court may send the summons to the employer at his place of business or, where the employee is a

company or corporation, to any secretary, manager or other like officer of the company or corporation, and

it shall be the duty of such employer or officer, as the case may be, to cause the summons to be served

personally on the defendant.

(3) In every case in which the summons are sent by registered post to a person other than the defendant,

the court shall also forward a duplicate of such summons, and it shall be the duty of the head of

department, employer or officer, as the case may be, to return such duplicate to the court forthwith with

an acknowledgment of the summons by the defendant or with a statement of the service endorsed thereon

and signed by the person effecting the service and countersigned by the person to whom the summons had

been forwarded by court if he has not himself effected the service.

(4) Where a defendant appears in court in person on summons being served on him in the manner

referred to above, he shall produce his national identity card or a valid passport, as the case may be, and it

shall be the duty of the Judge to satisfy himself that the person who has appeared before him and the

person on whom summons have been served in the manner aforesaid, is one and the same person.

(5) Where a defendant is represented by a registered attorney, the attorney shall in the proxy tendered on

behalf of the defendant, state the number of the identity card or the passport, as the case may be, of the








defendant and shall also make an endorsement thereon certifying the identity of such defendant, where a

proxy is tendered on behalf of a company or a body corporate it shall be tendered under the seal of such

company or the body corporate, as the case may be.

(6) In this section -

"head of department" -

(a) when used with reference to a member of any unit of the Sri Lanka Army, Navy or Air Force, means the

Commanding Officer of that unit;

(b) when used with reference to a person employed in a local authority, if the local authority is a Municipal

Council, means the Municipal Commissioner of that Council; if the local authority is an Urban Council or a

Preadeshiya Sabha, means the Chairman of that Council or Sabha;

(c) when used with reference to any other public officer means the head of the department of Government

in which such person is employed; and

"national identity card" when used with reference to any person, means the identity card issued to such

person under the Registration of Persons Act, No. 32 of 1968.

PINTO v. TRELLEBORG LANKA (PVT) LTD AND

ANOTHER

SLR 2003, Vol :3, : 214

CHANDRASENA VS MALKANTHI SLR 2005, Vol :3, : 286

LE MESURIER v. LE MESURIER et al. NLR Vol :1, : 160

BABUN NONA v. ARIYASENA NLR Vol :58, : 575

LEELIS SINGHO v. JOHN SINGHO NLR Vol :61, : 209

WICKRAMATILAKE v. DARSIN DE SILVA NLR Vol :62, : 97

Section No : 60 PERSONAL SERVICE. [3,14 of 1997]

60. (1) The court shall, where it is reported that summons could not be effected by registered post or

where the summons having been served and the defendant fails to appear, direct that such summons be

served personally on the defendant by delivering or tendering to him the said summons through the Fiscal

or the Grama Niladhari within whose division the defendant resides or in any case where the plaintiff is a

lending institution within the meaning of the Debt Recovery (Special Provisions) Act, No. 2 of 1990, through

the Fiscal or other officer authorized by court, accompanied by a precept in form No. 17 of the First

Schedule. In the case of a corporation summons may be served personally by delivering or tendering it to

the secretary or like officer or a director or the person in charge of the principal place of business of such

corporation.

(2) If the service referred to in the preceding provisions of this section cannot by the exercise of due diligence be effected, the Fiscal or Grama Niladhari shall affix the summons to some conspicuous part of the house in which the defendant ordinarily resides or in the case of a corporation or unincorporated body, to the usual place of business or office of such corporation or such body and in every such case the summon shall be deemed to have been duly served on the defendant.









DE MEL v. NETTASINGHE SLR 1993, Vol :2, : 332

CHANDRASENA VS MALKANTHI SLR 2005, Vol :3, : 286

RAMANATHAN AND ANOTHER vs. SATHYASEELAN AND OTHERS

SLR 2006, Vol :2, : 369

PALANIAPPA CHETTY v. ARNOLISHAMY NLR Vol :22, : 368

KARUPPEN CHETTY v. WICKREMASINGHA NLR Vol :33, : 233

SAMARASUNDERA v. SAMARASUNDERA NLR Vol :40, : 45


PERERA v. COMMISSIONER OF NATIONAL HOUSING NLR Vol :77, : 361

FERNANDO v. FERNANDO et al., NLR Vol :9, : 325

Section No : 61 PROOF OF SERVICE.

[3,14 of 1997]

61. When a summons is served by registered post, the advice of delivery issued under the Inland Post Rules,

and the endorsement of service, if any, and where the summons is served in any other manner, and

affidavit of such service shall be sufficient evidence of the service of the summons and of the date of such

service, and shall be admissible in evidence and the statements contained therein shall be deemed to be

correct unless and until the contrary is proved.

CHANDRASENA VS MALKANTHI SLR 2005, Vol 3 : 286

61. Substituted service. [12,20 of 1977] [4,14 of 1997]

CHANDRASENA VS MALKANTHISLR2005, Vol :3, Page: 286

62 SUBSTITUTED SERVICE 62. Whenever service is substituted by order of the court, the court shall fix a day, not being a day later

than three months from the day on which the defendant was earlier required to answer the plaint, on or

before which the defendant shall file his answer and comply with the other requirements of section 55.

no decisions were available on the amended section














Section No : 63 WHEN MORE DEFENDANTS THAN ONE, SERVICE ON

EACH. 63. When there are more defendants when more than one, service of the summons shall be defendants

made on each defendant.


SECTION NO : 64 AGENTS TO ACCEPT SERVICE; PARTNERS AND

MANAGER. 64. When a defendant has an appointed under section 30 empowered to accept service, service of

summons on such agent shall be sufficient. And in the case of an action against partners relative to a

partnership transaction, or to an actionable wrong in respect of which relief is claimable from the partners,

as a firm, each partner is an agent so empowered of each other partner, as is also the person (if any) not

being a partner, who has the management of the business of the partnership at the principal place of such

business within the local limits of the court's ordinary jurisdiction.

Nothing in the preceding provisions of this section shall be deemed to authorize summons in an action to

recover moneys due on a mortgage of immovable property to be served on any agent appointed under

section 30.

BLUE DIAMONDS LIMITED v. AMSTERDAM ROTTERDAM BANK M.V. AND ANOTHER (AMRO BANK

CASE)

SLR 1993, Vol :2, : 249

MATHER v. PERI TAMBY CHETTY NLR Vol :28, : 443

RAHIMAN v. PITCHAI KAGOO NLR Vol :53, : 116

64a Service on agent in mortgage action. 64A. Where the mortgagor has registered the address of an agent under section 30A, service of summons

may be made on such agent and shall be sufficient.

No decisions found









Section No : 65 When defendant out of jurisdiction has manager

within it. 65. In an action relating to any business or work against a person who does not reside within the local limits

of the jurisdiction of the court from which the summons issued, service on any manager or agent who at

the time of the service personally carries on such business or work for such person within such limits shall

be deemed good service; and for the purpose of this section the master of a ship is the agent of his owner

or charterer.

BLUE DIAMONDS LIMITED v. AMSTERDAM ROTTERDAM BANK M.V.

AND ANOTHER (AMRO BANK CASE)

SLR 1993, Vol :2, Page: 249

SHAMMARI v. PREMIER AIRLINE AGENCIES (PVT) LTD. SLR 1998, Vol :2, Page: 162

COLOMBO SHIPPING CO., LTD. v. CHIRAYU CLOTHING (PVT) LTD. (CASE NO. 2)

SLR 1999, Vol :1, Page: 213

RAMEN CHETTY v. MACKWOOD NLR Vol :24, Page: 73

BRITISH CEYLON CORPORATION v. LIONEL EDWARDS, LTD. NLR Vol :32, Page: 143

THURAISINGHAM et al. v. KARTHIKESU NLR Vol :50, Page: 570

ABILIAN v. DAVITH SINGHO NLR Vol :58, Page: 566

SINNATHAMBY v. YOKAMMAH NLR Vol :61, Page: 183

Section No : 66 Service on agent in charge of immovable property. 66. In an action to obtain relief respecting or compensation for wrong to immovable property, if the service

cannot be made on the defendant in person, and the defendant has no agent empowered to accept

service, it may be made on any agent of the defendant in charge of the property.

RATNAYAKE v. PADMINI DE SILVA AND ANOTHER SLR 1990, Vol :2, : 191

67. Misdescription not to vitiate summons, & c. 67. No misnomer or misdescription of any person or place in any such summons, order, or process shall

vitiate the same, provided that the person or place be therein described as he or it is commonly known,

and provided that such misnomer or misdescription be not such as to mislead the party served therewith.

NO CASES FOUND

68 Service on defendant in jail. 68. If the defendant be in jail, the summons shall be delivered by the Fiscal to the officer in charge of the

jail in which the defendant is confined, and such officer shall cause the summons to be served upon the

defendant. The summons shall be returned through the Fiscal to the court from which it is issued, with a

statement of the service endorsed thereon, and signed by the officer in charge of the jail.














MEERALEVVAI v. SEENITHAMBY NLR Vol :48, Page: 140

SECTION NO : 69 SERVICE OUT OF SRI LANKA. APPLICATION FOR, HOW

MADE. 69. Service of a summons out of Sri Lanka may be allowed by the court in all cases in which the court has

jurisdiction. Every application for an order for leave to serve such summons on a defendant out of Sri Lanka

shall be by motion and shall be supported by evidence (by affidavit or otherwise) showing in what place or

country such defendant is or may probably be found, and the grounds on which the application is made.

MILLER v. MURRAY NLR Vol :54, Page: 25

Order granting leave for service of summons out of Sri Lanka.

[6,79 of 1988]

70. Every order granting leave to effect service of summons out of Sri Lanka shall direct the mode by which

such service shall be effected, and also direct that the defendant shall on or before the date specified in the

summons, such date being a date not later than six months from the date of the order for service outside

Sri Lanka, file his answer and comply with the other requirements of section 55.

Form of summons.

71. A summons under sections 69 and 70 shall be in the form No. 18 in the First Schedule.

Section No : 71

ALWIS v. GUNATILLEKE NLR Vol :22, : 303

CHAPTER IX

OF FILING ANSWER

Judgment against defendant if he admits claim of the plaintiff.

[15,20 of 1977]






72. If the defendant admits the claim of the plaintiff, the court shall give judgment against the defendant

according to the admission so made. Such admission shall be in writing, signed by the defendant and his

signature attested by an attorney-at-law.

Section No : 72

JAYASINGHE v. MERCANTILE CREDIT LTD. SLR 1982, Vol :2, : 495

THE PEOPLE'S BANK V CAMILLUS PERERA SLR 2003, Vol :2, : 358

M.A.C.MALEEHA NONA v. C.M. MAHUMOOD NLR Vol :67, : 65

Answer to be in writing.

[15,20 of 1977]

73. If the defendant does not admit the plaintiffs claim, he shall himself, or his registered attorney shall on

his behalf, deliver to the court a duly stamped written answer.

Section No : 73

SILVA v. BABAHAMY NLR NLR 1 145

SECTION 74 REPAEALED

75. Requisites of answer. [17,20 of 1977]

75. Every such answer shall be distinctly written upon good and suitable paper, shall be duly

stamped, shall be subscribed by the defendant or his duly 1977] constituted representative as

in the case of a plaint is provided for the plaintiffs subscription, or if he is represented by a

registered attorney, by such registered attorney, and shall contain the following particulars:-

(a) the name of the court, the number of the case, and the date of filing the answer;

(b) the name of the plaintiff;







(c) the name, description, and residence of the defendant;

(d) a statement admitting or denying the several averments of the plaint, and setting out in

detail plainly and concisely the matters of fact and law, and the circumstances of the case

upon which the defendant means to rely for his defence; this statement shall be drawn in duly

numbered paragraphs, referring by number, where necessary, to the paragraphs of the plaint;

(e) when the defendant sets up a claim in reconvention the answer must contain a plain and

concise statement of the facts constituting the ground of such claim which the defendant

makes in reconvention. A claim in reconvention duly set up in the answer shall have the same

effect as a plaint in a cross action so as to enable the court to pronounce a final judgment in

the same action both on the original and on the cross claim; but it shall not affect the lien

upon the amount decreed of any registered attorney in respect of the costs payable to him

under the decree.

JOONOOS v. CHANDRARATNE

BLUE DIAMONDS LIMITED v. AMSTERDAM ROTTERDAM BANK M.V. AND ANOTHER (AMRO BANK CASE)

SLR 1993, Vol :2, : 249

UVAIS v. PUNYAWATHIE SLR 1993, Vol :2, : 46

G.T.E. DIRECTORIES LANKA (PVT) LTD. v. MUKTHAR MARIKKAR AND ANOTHER

SLR 1998, Vol :3, : 180

MUTHUCUMARANA v. WIMALARATNE AND ANOTHER SLR 1999, Vol :1, : 139

NADARAJAH v. DANIEL SLR 1999, Vol :1, : 240

WIJERATNE AND ANOTHER v. WEERATUNGA SLR 1999, Vol :1, : 332

WIJERATNE V WIJERATNA SLR 2004, Vol :2, : 159

FERNANDO VS SlLVA SLR 2005, Vol :2, : 1

ABBAS VS ABBAS AND OTHERS SLR 2005, Vol :2, : 75

RAVINORAN AND ANOTHER VS SOYSA AND ANOTHER SLR 2005, Vol :3, : 56

CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LTD. AND

ANOTHERVSGUNASEKERA

SLR 2006, Vol :2, : 63

RAVI KARUNANAYAKE VS WIMAL WEERAWANSA SLR 2006, Vol :3, : 16

KARIYAWASAM v RAJASURIYA SLR 2008, Vol :2, : 335

PERERA v. PERERA. NLR Vol :11, : 1

APPU SINNO et al. v. DE SILVA NLR Vol :15, : 51

ARUNACHALAM v. MOHAMADU NLR Vol :17, : 255

MUTTUNAYAGAM v. BRITO et al., NLR Vol :22, : 329

MOHAMADU v. MARIKAR NLR Vol :31, : 289

FERNANDO v. SAMARASEKERE NLR Vol :49, : 285
























KARUNATILLEKE v. KARUNATILLEKE et al., NLR Vol :52, : 300

VEERAVAKU v. SUPPRAMANIAN NLR Vol :6, : 52

YAHIYA v. PERERA NLR Vol :73, : 305

MUNICIPAL COUNCIL OF JAFFNA v. DODWELL & Co. LTD. NLR Vol :74, : 25

SURIAN PULLE et al. v. SILVA et al., NLR Vol :9, : 80

76 Jurisdiction of court to be specially traversed. 76. If the defendant intends to dispute the averment in the plaint as to the jurisdiction of the court, he

must do so by a separate and distinct plea, expressly traversing such averment.

JOONOOS v. CHANDRARATNE SLR 1990, Vol :2, : 337

BLUE DIAMONDS LIMITED v. AMSTERDAM

ROTTERDAM BANK M.V. AND ANOTHER (AMRO BANK

CASE)

SLR 1993, Vol :2, : 249

VARUNA JAYASURIYA VS KRlSHANJINI JAYASURIYA SLR 2005, Vol :2, : 382

ARIYARATNE vs PREMADASA SLR 2006, Vol :3, : 161

KARIYAWASAM v RAJASURIYA SLR 2008, Vol :2, : 335

GUNASEKERA v. POMPEUS NLR Vol :21, : 110

77. Rejection and amendment of answer. [7,79 of 1988]

77. If any answer is substantially defective in any of the particulars hereinbefore defined, or is

argumentative or prolix, or contains matter irrelevant to the action, the court may, by an order to be

endorsed thereon, reject the same or return it to the party by whom it was made, for amendment within a

period not exceeding one month from the date on which the answer was so returned, and the court may

impose such terms as to costs or otherwise as it thinks fit.

If the answer is rejected or left unamended as ordered, the defendant shall be regarded as having failed to

file answer.

The order so endorsed shall specify the ground of the rejection.

JAYAWICKRAMA et al v. AMARASOORIYA NLR Vol :17, : 174

COORAY v. JAYAWARDENE NLR Vol :43, : 427

DE MEL v. THENUWARA NLR Vol :50, : 391

KARUNATILLEKE v. KARUNATILLEKE et al., NLR Vol :52, : 300

MARIYA UMMA v. THE ORIENTAL GOVERNMENT SECURITY LIFE ASSURANCE CO., LTD.

NLR Vol :57, : 145




















DEWANDARA v. FERNANDO NLR Vol :60, : 562

78. Copy of answer to be delivered to plaintiff or his registered

attorney. [18,20 of 1977]

78. A copy of the answer shall be served on the plaintiff, or each of the plaintiffs, if more than one, or his or

their registered attorney.

CHAPTER X

OF THE REPLICATION AND FURTHER PLEADINGS

When replication may be allowed. [19,20 of 1977]

79. Except in the case of a claim by a defendant in reconvention, no pleading after answer shall be tiled

except by order of court on special motion to be made after due notice to the other side, and before the

day appointed for the hearing of the action, upon such terms as to costs and the postponement of the

hearing of the action as the court shall think fit. Such order shall not be made (except in the case of a claim

in reconvention on the part of the defendant) unless the court is satisfied on such motion that the real

issues between the parties cannot be conveniently raised without such further pleading. All pleadings after

answer shall be subject to the rules prescribed by section 75 relative to the form and substance of the

answer, so far as the same can be made applicable, and copies of such pleadings shall be served on the

opposite party or his registered attorney.

Section No : 79

PAKISTAN INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES CORPORATION

v. YASEEN OMAR

SLR 1985, Vol :2, : 143

COORAY v. JAYAWARDENE NLR Vol :43, : 427

DEWANDARA v. FERNANDO NLR Vol :60, : 562

CHAPTER XI

OF FIXING DAY OF TRIAL

Day of trial. [8,79 of 1988]







80. On the date fixed for the filing of the answer of the defendant or where replication is permitted, on the

date fixed for the filing of such replication, and whether the same is filed or not, the court shall appoint a

date for the trial of the action, and shall give notice thereof, in writing by registered post to all parties who

have furnished a registered address and tendered the cost of service of such notice, as provided by

subsection (2) of section 55.

CEYLON INSURANCE CO., LTD. v. NANAYAKKARA AND

ANOTHER

SLR 1999, Vol :3, : 50

LORENSU APPUHAMY et al. v. PAARIS et al., NLR Vol :11, : 202


SAMSUDEEN v. EAGLE STAR INSURANCE CO. LTD. NLR Vol :64, : 372

81. A reasonable number of cases to be fixed for each day. 81. The court shall, in fixing the day of hearing, be careful not to appoint more cases for one day than there

is a probability of the court getting through on that day.

82. Postponement. 82. When any case is in its turn called on for hearing upon the day appointed there for, the court may, for

sufficient cause to be specified in its written order, direct that the hearing be postponed to a day which

shall be fixed in the order, upon such terms as to costs or otherwise as the court shall think fit;

Provided that the court may in its discretion take and deal with a case out of its order in the cause list on

any day for good reason to be adjudicated upon and recorded by the court before entering upon the case.

Section No : 82

CALISTUS PERERA v. NAWANGE SLR 1994, Vol :3, : 305

FRANCIS WANIGASEKERA AND ANOTHER v. PATHIRANA

SLR 1997, Vol :3, : 231

LEELAWATHIE VS. EKANAYAKE SLR 2005, Vol :3, : 155

KANDASAMY VS. KANDASAMY SLR 2006, Vol :2, : 260

FERNANDO v. CURERA NLR Vol :2, : 29

MATCHER v. DE ABREW NLR Vol :38, : 366

RAMAPILLAI v. ZAVIER et al NLR Vol :47, : 281

SYADU VARUSAI v. WEERASEKERAM NLR Vol :58, : 89


PERERA v. AMBALAVANAR NLR Vol :70, : 563

PERERA v. GONADUWA NLR Vol :74, : 207



















83. Undisposed of cases to be placed at the head of the roll. 83.

(1) The cases in any day's cause list not disposed of on that day, by reason of want of time, will be placed at

the head of the next court-day's cause list, unless the Judge directs otherwise.

[21,20 of 1977]

(2) As soon as the cause list for any day is prepared, legibly-written copies of it in the language of the court

and the language or languages of the parties shall be placed in some fit and conspicuous place outside the

court-house, so that the suitors and all others interested may be enabled readily to be informed of the

contents of the same.

WEERAMAN v. SADACHARAN SLR 2002, Vol :3, : 222


CHAPTER XII

84. OF THE CONSEQUENCES AND CURE (WHEN PERMISSIBLE) OF

DEFAULT IN PLEADING OR APPEARING

Default of defendant. [23,20 of 1977]

84. If the defendant fails to file his answer on or before the day fixed for the filing of the answer, or on or

before the day fixed for the subsequent filing of the answer or having filed his answer, if he fails to appear

on the day fixed (or the hearing of the action, and if the court is satisfied that the defendant has been duly

served with summons, or has received due notice of the day fixed for the subsequent filing of the answer,

or of the day fixed for the hearing of the action, as the case may be, and if, on the occasion of such default

of the defendant, the plaintiff appears, then the court shall proceed to hear the case ex pane forthwith, or

on such other day as the court may fix.

Section No : 84

SITTHI MALEEHA AND ANOTHER v. NIHAL IGNATIUS

PERERA AND OTHERS

SLR 1994, Vol :3, : 270

MRS. SIRIMAVO BANDARANAIKE v. TIMES OF CEYLON LIMITED.

SLR 1995, Vol :1, : 22








ABN AMRO BANK, N V v. CONMIX [PVT] LTD. AND OTHERS

SLR 1996, Vol :1, : 8

SHEILA SENEVIRATNE v. SHEREEN DHARMARATNE SLR 1997, Vol :1, : 76

WIMALAWATHIE AND OTHERS v. THOTAMUNA AND

OTHERS

SLR 1998, Vol :3, : 1

ISEK FERNANDO v. RITA FERNANDO AND OTHERS SLR 1999, Vol :3, : 29

SISILINONA v. BALASURIYA SLR 2002, Vol :1, : 404


DHARMASENA AND ANOTHER v. THE PEOPLE'S BANK SLR 2003, Vol :1, : 122

WIJESEKERA vs WIJESEKERA AND OTHERS SLR 2005, Vol :1, : 58

KANDASAMY VS. KANDASAMY SLR 2006, Vol :2, : 260

IMAM V. PETER AND OTHERS SLR 2009, Vol :2, : 121

SCHARENGUIVEL v. ORR NLR Vol :28, : 302

MATCHER v. DE ABREW NLR Vol :38, : 366

SILVA v. ARNOLIS NLR Vol :3, : 108

MOHIDEEN et al. v. MARIKAR NLR Vol :41, : 249

DE SARAM v. DE SILVA et al., NLR Vol :41, : 419

AUSTIN DE MEL v. KODAGODA NLR Vol :46, : 150

WEERASOORIYA v. CONTROLLER OF

ESTABLISHMENTS

NLR Vol :51, : 189

ADDITIONAL CONTROLLER OF ESTABLISHMENTS v.

CORNELS FERNANDO

NLR Vol :54, : 45

VYRAMUTTU, K. v. MYLVAGANAM, R. NLR Vol :55, : 47

RATNAM PILLAI v. ABDUL LATIFF NLR Vol :58, : 372

HERATH v. ATTORNEY GENERAL NLR Vol :60, : 193

NANAYAKKARA v. FALEEL NLR Vol :60, : 304

ALIM v. AMARASINGHAM NLR Vol :63, : 207

DHARMADASA v. PIYADASA PERERA NLR Vol :64, : 249

ODIRIS APPUHAMY v. CAROLINE NONA NLR Vol :66, : 241

CASSIM HADJIAR v. UMAMLEVVE NLR Vol :67, : 22

GRACE PERERA v. LILIAN SILVA NLR Vol :68, : 234

KATHIRESU v. SINNIAH NLR Vol :71, : 450

DINGIRI AMMA v. APPUHAMY NLR Vol :72, : 347

85. Procedure in ex parte trial. [23,20 of 1977]

85. (1) The plaintiff may place evidence before the court in support of his claim by affidavit, or by oral

testimony and move for judgment, and the court, if 1977] satisfied that the plaintiff is entitled to the relief


































claimed by him, either in its entirety or subject to modification, may enter such judgment in favour of the

plaintiff as to it shall seem proper, and enter decree accordingly.

(2) Where the court is of opinion that the entirety of the relief claimed by the plaintiff cannot be granted,

the court shall hear the plaintiff before modifying the relief claimed.

(3) Where there are several defendants of whom one or more file answer and another or others of whom

fail to file answer, the plaintiff may move for judgment against such of the defendants as may be in default

without prejudice to his right to proceed with the action against such of the defendants as may have filed

answer. The provisions of this subsection shall apply notwithstanding that the defendants are jointly liable

upon a bill of exchange, promissory note or cheque.

(4) The court shall cause a copy of the decree entered under this section to be served on the defendant in

the manner prescribed for the service of summons. Such copy of the decree shall bear an endorsement that

any application to set aside the decree under subsection (2) of section 86 shall be made to court within

fourteen days of such service.

Section No : 85

SITTHI MALEEHA AND ANOTHER v. NIHAL IGNATIUS PERERA AND OTHERS

SLR 1994, Vol :3, : 270


SLR 1995, Vol :1, : 22

NAVAROCH v. SHRIKANTHAN AND OTHERS SLR 1997, Vol :1, : 286

SHEILA SENEVIRATNE v. SHEREEN DHARMARATNE SLR 1997, Vol :1, : 76

DHAMMASIRI THERO v. SUGATHA THERO SLR 1998, Vol :3, : 388

BABY v. BANDA AND OTHERS SLR 1999, Vol :3, : 416

MUNIDASA v. GUNADASA SLR 2001, Vol :3, : 17

COOMARASWAMY v. MARIMMA SLR 2001, Vol :3, : 312


THE ATTORNEY GENERAL v. HERATH AND ANOTHER SLR 2003, Vol :2, : 162

EKANAYAKE V.EKANAYAKE SLR 2003, Vol :2, : 221

WICRAMARATNE vs. SENANAYAKE. SLR 2005, Vol :1, : 222


EDMAN ABEYWICKREMA v DR. UPALl ATHAUDA AND ANOTHER

SLR 2008, Vol :1, : 255

SENANAYAKE v. COORAY NLR Vol :15, : 36

KOROSSA RUBBER COMPANY v. SILVA et al., NLR Vol :20, : 65

BRAMPY v. PERIS NLR Vol :3, : 34

AMARASEKERE v. FERNANDO NLR Vol :49, : 60

ANNAMAH v. SUBRAMANIAM NLR Vol :51, : 547
























PERERA v. ALWIS NLR Vol :60, : 260

SINNATHAMBY v. YOKAMMAH NLR Vol :61, : 183


CHRISTINA v. CECILIN FERNANDO NLR Vol :65, : 274

SALLY v. NOOR MOHAMED NLR Vol :66, : 175

JOHANIS APPUHAMY v. CARLINCHO NLR Vol :67, : 144

E.VELUPILLAI v. C. SIVASITHAMPARAM NLR Vol :67, : 80

THAILANAYAKI v. KULANTHAIVELU NLR Vol :68, : 176

BOARD OF DIRECTIORS OF SAVINGS BANK v. NAGODAVITANE

NLR Vol :71, : 90

DINGIRI AMMA v. APPUHAMY NLR Vol :72, : 347

FERNANDO v. THE QUEEN NLR Vol :74, : 49

MUDIYANSE v. PUNCHI BANDA RANAWEERA NLR Vol :77, : 501

DE SILVA v. DE SILVA NLR Vol :77, : 554

86. If defendant excuses his default, any order or judgment to be set

aside. [23,20 of 1977]

86. (2) Where, within fourteen days of the service of the decree entered against him for default, the

defendant with notice to the plaintiff makes application to and thereafter satisfies court, that he had

reasonable grounds for such default, the court shall set aside the judgment and decree and permit the

defendant to proceed with his defence as from the stage of default upon such terms as to costs or

otherwise as to the court shall appear proper.

[3,53 of 1980]

(2A) At any time prior to the entering of judgment against a defendant for default, the court may, if the

plaintiff consents, but not otherwise, set aside any order made on the basis of the default of the defendant

and permit him to proceed with his defence as from the stage of default upon such terms as to costs or

otherwise as to the court shall appear fit.

(3) Every application under this section shall be made by petition supported by affidavit.

Section No : 86

PETER SINGHO v. WYDAMAN SLR 1983, Vol :2, : 238

MERCANTILE CREDIT LTD., v. SISIRA KUMARA AND ANOTHER

SLR 1991, Vol :1, : 308



















NANAYAKKARA v. WARNAKULASURIYA SLR 1993, Vol :2, : 289

SITTHI MALEEHA AND ANOTHER v. NIHAL IGNATIUS

PERERA AND OTHERS

SLR 1994, Vol :3, : 270

DE FONSEKA v. DHARMAWARDENA SLR 1994, Vol :3, : 49

SITA RAJASINGHAM v. MAUREEN SENEVIRATNE AND ANOTHER

SLR 1995, Vol :2, : 69


SLR 1996, Vol :1, : 8

WIMALAWATHIE AND OTHERS v. THOTAMUNA AND OTHERS

SLR 1998, Vol :3, : 1

DHAMMASIRI THERO v. SUGATHA THERO SLR 1998, Vol :3, : 388

FERNANDO v. CEYLON BREWERYS LTD. SLR 1998, Vol :3, : 61

INAYA v. LANKA ORIX LEASING COMPANY LTD. SLR 1999, Vol :3, : 197

THE CEYLON BREWERY LIMITED. v. JAX FERNANDO,

PROPRIETOR, MARADANA WINE STORES

SLR 2001, Vol :1, : 270

COOMARASWAMY v. MARIMMA SLR 2001, Vol :3, : 312


WEERAMAN v. SADACHARAN SLR 2002, Vol :3, : 222

KARUNADASA v. REV. PHILLIPS SLR 2003, Vol :2, : 140


RANASINGHE v. TIKIRI BANDA SLR 2003, Vol :3, : 252

DHARMASENA v. RAJENDRA SLR 2003, Vol :3, : 269


JAVASINGHE VS RAMANAYAKE AND OTHERS SLR 2005, Vol :2, : 39

MARIKKAR VS VANIK INCORPORATION LTD AND

OTHERS

SLR 2006, Vol :1, : 281

ASSOCIATED NEWSPAPERS OF CEYLON LTD. vs.

FELICIA KARIYAKARAWANA

SLR 2006, Vol :2, : 359


JAYATISSA VS. NANDAWATHIE AND OTHERS SLR 2006, Vol :3, : 37

UNIVERSAL MARKETING SERVICES (PVT) LTD. AND

ANOTHER v INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK

SLR 2007, Vol :1, : 7

EDMAN ABEYWICKREMA v DR. UPALl ATHAUDA AND ANOTHER

SLR 2008, Vol :1, : 255

IMAM V. PETER AND OTHERS SLR 2009, Vol :2, : 121

SENANAYAKE v. COORAY NLR Vol :15, : 36

SILVA v. GRERO NLR Vol :1, : 67

JAYASURIYA v. KOTALAWALA et al., NLR Vol :23, : 511

MOHAMED ALLIAR v. SEGU MOHAMADO MARIKAR NLR Vol :30, : 1

AMARASEKERE v. FERNANDO NLR Vol :49, : 60

PERERA v. ALWIS NLR Vol :60, : 260











































NORTON PERERA v. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF

AGRARIAN SERVICES, KEGALLA

NLR Vol :65, : 501

SALLY v. NOOR MOHAMED NLR Vol :66, : 175


DE SILVA v. DE SILVA NLR Vol :77, : 554

FERNANDO v. THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF ANDIAMBALAMA

NLR Vol :78, : 4

87. Non-appearance of Plaintiff. [23,20 of 1977]

87.

(1) Where the plaintiff or where both the plaintiff and the defendant make trial, the court shall dismiss the

plaintiffs action.

(2) Where an action has been dismissed under this section, the plaintiff shall be precluded from bringing a

fresh action in respect of the same cause of action.

(3) The plaintiff may apply within a reasonable time from the date of dismissal, by way of petition

supported by affidavit, to have the dismissal set aside, and if on the hearing of such application, of which

the defendant shall be given notice, the court is satisfied that there were reasonable grounds for the non-

appearance of the plaintiff, the court shall make order setting aside the dismissal upon such terms as to

costs or otherwise as it thinks fit, and shall appoint a day for proceeding with the action as from the stage

at which the dismissal for default was made.

Section No : 87

NANAYAKKARA v. WARNAKULASURIYA SLR 1993, Vol :2, : 289

JINADASA AND ANOTHER v. SAM SILVA AND OTHERS SLR 1994, Vol :1, : 232

SITTHI MALEEHA AND ANOTHER v. NIHAL IGNATIUS PERERA AND OTHERS

SLR 1994, Vol :3, : 270


SLR 1995, Vol :1, : 22

ABDEEN v. MANEL DAHANAYAKE SLR 1997, Vol :3, : 71


CHANDRAWATHIE v. DHARMARATNE AND ANOTHER SLR 2002, Vol :1, : 43







http://www.lawlanka.com/lal/nlrDetailReportView?caseId=NLR78IV4

http://www.lawlanka.com/lal/nlrDetailReportView?caseId=NLR78IV4











MANATUNGA v AMARASINGHE SLR 2004, Vol :3, : 7

RAUK VS L. B. FINANCE LTD SLR 2005, Vol :2, : 104

ALIMA UMMA VS SIYANERIS SLR 2006, Vol :1, : 22

LlNGANATHAN AND ANOTHER VS JAFFERJEE AND

OTHERS

SLR 2006, Vol :1, : 353


KAROLIS v WICKREMARATNE SLR 2008, Vol :1, : 193

REV. SUMANATISSA vs HARRY SLR 2009, Vol :1, : 31


JAYASURIYA v. KOTALAWALA et al., NLR Vol :23, : 511

THE CEYLON GEMMING AND MINING COMPANY v. SYMONS

NLR Vol :2, : 226

MOHAMED ALLIAR v. SEGU MOHAMADO MARIKAR NLR Vol :30, : 1

CONDERLAG v. MUTTIAH PULLE NLR Vol :30, : 73

SUBRAMANIAM CHETTY v. MARIA NLR Vol :30, : 75

SUPPAMMAL v. THEVAR NLR Vol :52, : 265

KING v. HARVEY NLR Vol :5, : 129


KATHIRESU v. SINNIAH NLR Vol :71, : 450

BOARD OF DIRECTIORS OF SAVINGS BANK v. NAGODAVITANE

NLR Vol :71, : 90

FERNANDO v. FERNANDO et al., NLR Vol :9, : 325

88. No appeal against Judgment for default but order setting aside or

refusing to set aside judgment appealable. [23,20 of 1977]

88.

(1) No appeal shall lie against any judgment entered upon default.

(2) The order setting aside or refusing to set aside the judgment entered upon default shall be accompanied

by a judgment adjudicating upon the facts and specifying the grounds upon which it is made, and shall be

liable to an appeal to the Court of Appeal.

[4,53 of 1980]























(3) The provisions of sections 761 and 763 shall, mutatis mutandis, apply to and in relation to the execution

of a decree entered upon default, where an order refusing to set aside such decree has been made.

Section No : 88


SLR 1995, Vol :1, : 22

ABDEEN v. MANEL DAHANAYAKE SLR 1997, Vol :3, : 71

WIMALAWATHIE AND OTHERS v. THOTAMUNA AND

OTHERS

SLR 1998, Vol :3, : 1

AUSTRALANKA EXPORTERS PVT LTD. v. INDIAN BANK SLR 2001, Vol :2, : 156



REV. MINUWANGODA DHAMMIKA THERO v. REV. GALLE SARADHA THERO

SLR 2003, Vol :3, : 247

DHARMASENA v. RAJENDRA SLR 2003, Vol :3, : 269

GAMINI vs CHANDRA AND OTHERS SLR 2005, Vol :2, : 72

LEELAWATHIE VS. EKANAYAKE SLR 2005, Vol :3, : 155

LlNGANATHAN AND ANOTHER VS JAFFERJEE AND OTHERS

SLR 2006, Vol :1, : 353

JAYATISSA VS. NANDAWATHIE AND OTHERS SLR 2006, Vol :3, : 37

LETCHIMANEN CHETTY v. ABDUL RAHIMAN, ex parte

MUTTUSAMY PILLAI

NLR Vol :11, : 123


CARRIM v. WAHID NLR Vol :23, : 270

APPUHAMY v. RAMANATHAN NLR Vol :25, : 430

PONAMPALAM v. CANAGASABY et al NLR Vol :2, : 23

NANAYAKKARA v. FALEEL NLR Vol :60, : 304

NADARASA v. NAVAMANY NLR Vol :64, : 232

ESWARALINGAM.S v. SIVAGNANASUNDARAM.N NLR Vol :64, : 396

LOUIS v. EMMANUEL NLR Vol :73, : 42

89. Where two or more defendants severally liable. 89. In the case of an action against two or more defendants alleged to be severally liable, where a

summons is served upon any of them, the plaintiff may proceed against the person or persons served as if

no other defendant were named in the summons. Where it is served upon all of them, the plaintiff may

take judgment against one or more of them, where he would be entitled to judgment if the action was

against him or them alone. Where judgment is so taken the plaintiff may proceed in the same action

against the other defendants.




























90. One of many defendants appearing, no decree for default need be

passed against others. 90. In the case of an action where there are more defendants than one, the court shall not be obliged to

pass a decree for default against a defendant for failing to appear at a stage of the action, provided that

one defendant at least appears at that stage against whom the action must proceed,

ADLIN FERNANDO AND ANOTHER v. LIONEL

FERNANDO AND OTHERS

SLR 1995, Vol :2, : 25

COLOMBO SHIPPING CO. LTD. v. CHIRAYU CLOTHING

(PVT) LTD.

SLR 1995, Vol :2, : 97

ABN AMRO BANK, N V v. CONMIX [PVT] LTD. AND

OTHERS

SLR 1996, Vol :1, : 8

SELAN BANK PLC vs SAMANELlYA TEAS (PRIVATE)

LIMITED AND 3 OTHERS

SLR 2009, Vol :1, : 134

SUBRAMANIAM CHETTY v. MARIA NLR Vol :30, : 75

CHAPTER XIII

91 OF MOTIONS

[23,20 of 1977]

91. Every application made to the court in the course of an action, incidental thereto, and not a step in the

regular procedure, shall be made by motion by the applicant in person or his counsel or registered

attorney, and a memorandum in writing of such motion shall be at the same time delivered to the court.

Section No : 91

CAROLINE PERERA AND ANOTHER v. MARTIN PERERA

AND ANOTHER

SLR 2002, Vol :2, : 1

GUNAWARDENA v. RAN MENIKE AND OTHERS SLR 2002, Vol :3, : 243

PAR MARKETERS (PVT.) LTD V HATTON NATIONAL BANK LTD

SLR 2004, Vol :3, : 297

PERERA v. ANDRIS NLR Vol :26, : 289


CORNELIUS PERERA v. LEO PERERA NLR Vol :62, : 413

UKKU AMMA v. PARAMANATHAN NLR Vol :63, : 306

SENANAYAKA v. GAMAGE NLR Vol :64, : 517

PERERA v. GONADUWA NLR Vol :74, : 207






















91 A. Postponements, adjournments and extensions of time. [25,20 of 1977]

91A.

(1) Where a day is fixed or time appointed for doing any act or taking any proceeding by a party to the

action, the court may, from time to time, upon the motion of such party and, if sufficient cause is shown, fix

another day or enlarge or abridge the time appointed, upon such terms, if any, as to it may seem proper.

(2) The day may be refixed or the time enlarged although the application for the same is not made until

after the expiration of the day or time fixed or appointed.

(3) The court may, for sufficient cause, either on the application of the parties or of its own motion,

advance, postpone or adjourn the trial to any other date upon such terms as to costs or otherwise as to it

shall seem proper.

(4) Where a date is fixed on or before which an act has to be done by a party to the action or a return has

to be made to a commission issued by the court, the case shall be called in open court on such date for the

purpose of making an appropriate order in connection therewith or relating thereto.

CALISTUS PERERA v. NAWANGE SLR 1994, Vol :3, : 305


SLR 1996, Vol :1, : 8

FRANCIS WANIGASEKERA AND ANOTHER v. PATHIRANA

SLR 1997, Vol :3, : 231

CHAPTER XIV

92. OF THE JOURNAL Journal.

92. With the institution of the action the court shall commence a journal entitled as of the action, in which

shall be minuted, as they occur, all the events in the course of the action, i.e., the original application, and

every subsequent step, proceeding, and order; each minute shall be signed and dated by the Judge, and the

journal so kept shall be the principal record of the action.

Section No : 92

SHELL GAS COMPANY v. ALL CEYLON COMMERCIAL

AND INDUSTRIAL WORKER'S UNION

SLR 1998, Vol :1, : 118









BYRDE v. CARPEN CHETTY NLR Vol :12, : 114

MEENATCHI v. RENGAPPA PULLE et al., NLR Vol :15, : 449

SEEBERT SILVA v. ARONONA SILVA NLR Vol :60, : 272

THENUWARA v. THENUWARA NLR Vol :61, : 49

VICTOR DE SILVA v. JINADASA DE SILVA NLR Vol :68, : 45

CHAPTER XV

93. OF AMENDMENT Amendments of pleadings.

[9,79 of 1988]

[3,9 of 1991]

93. (1) Upon application made to it before the day first fixed for trial of the action, in the presence of, or

after reasonable notice to all the parties to the action, the Court shall have full power of amending in its

discretion, all pleadings in the action, by way of addition, or alteration, or of omission.

(2) On or after the day first fixed for the trial of the action and before final judgement, no application for

the amendment of any pleadings shall be allowed unless the Court is satisfied, for reasons to be recorded

by the Court, that grave and irremediable injustice will be caused if such amendment is not permitted, and

on no other ground, and that the party so applying has not been guilty of laches.

(3) Any application for amendment of pleadings which may be allowed by the Court under subsection (1) or

(2) shall be upon such terms as to costs and postponement or otherwise as the Court may think fit.

(4) The additions or alterations or omissions shall be clearly made on the face of the pleading affected by

the Order ;or if this cannot conveniently be done, a fair copy of the pleading as altered shall, be appended

in the record of the action to the pleading amended. Every such addition or alteration or omission shall be

signed by the Judge.

Section No : 93

HATTON NATIONAL BANK LTD. v. WHITTAL BOUSTEAD LTD.

SLR 1978-79, Vol :2, : 257

GORDON FRAZER & CO. LTD. v. LADY GYMARA FERNANDO

SLR 1980, Vol :2, : 97

ABEYWARDENA AND OTHERS v. EUGINAHAMY AND OTHERS

SLR 1984, Vol :2, : 231

MACKINNON MACKENZIE & CO. v. GRINDLAYS BANK LTD.

SLR 1986, Vol :2, : 272

WIJESINGHE v. KARUNADASA SLR 1987, Vol :2, : 179







http://www.lawlanka.com/lal/slrDetailReportView?caseId=1978-79SLR2V257

http://www.lawlanka.com/lal/slrDetailReportView?caseId=1978-79SLR2V257








PILAPITIYA v. BUDDADASA AND ANOTHER SLR 1990, Vol :2, : 186

GUNASEKERA AND ANOTHER v. ABDUL LATIFF SLR 1995, Vol :1, : 225

AVUDIAPPAN v. INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK SLR 1995, Vol :2, : 131

COLOMBO SHIPPING CO. LTD. v. CHIRAYU CLOTHING

(PVT) LTD.

SLR 1995, Vol :2, : 97

KURUPPUARACHCHI v. ANDREAS SLR 1996, Vol :2, : 11

JAYASINGHE v. GNANAWATHIE MENIKE SLR 1997, Vol :3, : 410

SHAMMARI v. PREMIER AIRLINE AGENCIES (PVT)

LTD.

SLR 1998, Vol :2, : 162

HATTON NATIONAL BANK v. SILVA AND ANOTHER SLR 1999, Vol :3, : 113

ROHANA v. SHYAMA ATTYGALA &OTHERS SLR 1999, Vol :3, : 381

CEYLON INSURANCE CO., LTD. v. NANAYAKKARA AND

ANOTHER

SLR 1999, Vol :3, : 50

PARAMALINGAM v. SIRISENA AND ANOTHER SLR 2001, Vol :2, : 239

RAJASINGHAM v. SENEVIRATNE AND ANOTHER SLR 2002, Vol :1, : 82


WIJESUNDARA v. WIJESUNDARA SLR 2003, Vol :1, : 374

WIMALASIRI AND ANOTHER v. PREMASIRI SLR 2003, Vol :3, : 330

SEYLAN BANK v THANGAVEIL SLR 2004, Vol :2, : 101

SENEVIRATNE VS HERATH AND ANOTHER SLR 2005, Vol :2, : 295

THENUWARP, VS SlMO NONA AND OTHERS SLR 2005, Vol :2, : 309

SUMANAWATHIE KARUNARATNE AND OTHERS VS ARIYARATNE

SLR 2005, Vol :2, : 47

RUSHANTHA PERERA VS WIJESEKERA SLR 2005, Vol :3, : 105

COLOMBO DOCKYARD LTD VS JAYASIRI PERERA AND

OTHERS

SLR 2006, Vol :1, : 99


KARUNARATNE V ALWIS SLR 2007, Vol :1, : 214

MENDIS V MENDIS SLR 2007, Vol :2, : 79

KANAGARAJ VS. ALANKARA SLR 2010, Vol :1, : 185

SENEVIRATNA v. CANDAPPA NLR Vol :20, : 60

CASSIM LEBBE v. NATCHIYA NLR Vol :21, : 205

AVVA UMMAH v. CASINADER NLR Vol :24, : 199

FERNANDO v. PALANIAPPA CHETTY NLR Vol :28, : 273

RATWATTE v. OWEN NLR Vol :2, : 141

FERNANDO v. SOYSA NLR Vol :2, : 40

MUTTUMENIKA v. SUDUMENIKA NLR Vol :45, : 58

WADUGANATHAN CHETTIAR v. SENA ABDUL CASSIM NLR Vol :54, : 185

DON ALWIS v. VILLAGE COMMITTEE OF HIRIPITIYA NLR Vol :54, : 225








































C. A. ODIRIS SILVA & SONS, LTD. v. JAYAWARDENE, P.

NLR Vol :55, : 335

LUINONA v. GUNASEKARA NLR Vol :60, : 346


AZIZ v. THONDAMAN NLR Vol :61, : 217

UBERIS v. JAYAWARDENE NLR Vol :62, : 217

EKANAYAKE v. EKANAYAKE NLR Vol :63, : 188

THE BANK OF CEYLON, JAFFNA v. CHELLIAHPILLAI NLR Vol :64, : 25

LEBBE v. SANDANAM NLR Vol :64, : 461

DARYANANI v. EASTERN SILK EMPORIUM LTD. NLR Vol :64, : 529

THIRUMALAY v. KULANDAVELU NLR Vol :66, : 285

N.DALUWATTA v. M.B. SENANAYAKE NLR Vol :67, : 524

E.VELUPILLAI v. C. SIVASITHAMPARAM NLR Vol :67, : 80

WALLES v. HECTOR SILVA NLR Vol :70, : 308

MARTIN v. THENUWARA NLR Vol :70, : 332

MUNICIPAL COUNCIL OF JAFFNA v. DODWELL & Co.

LTD.

NLR Vol :74, : 25

FERNANDO v. RONALD NLR Vol :75, : 231

DE ALWIS v. DE ALWIS NLR Vol :76, : 444

DINORIS APPUHAMY v. SOPHIE NONA NLR Vol :77, : 188

SHERMAN DE SILVA & Co., LTD. v. DE SILVA NLR Vol :77, : 275

CHAPTER XVI

94. OF DISCOVERY, INSPECTION, PRODUCTION, IMPOUNDING, AND

RETURN OF DOCUMENTS Interrogatories.

94.

(1) Any party may at any time before hearing, by leave of the court to be obtained on motion ex parte,

deliver through the court interrogatories in writing for the examination of the opposite party, or, where

there are more opposite parties than one, any one or more of such parties, with a note at the foot thereof

stating which of such interrogatories each of such persons is required to answer:

Provided that no party shall deliver more than one set of interrogatories to the same person without the

permission of the court, and that no defendant shall deliver interrogatories for the examination of the

plaintiff unless such defendant has previously tendered his answer, and such answer has been received and

placed on the record.






















(2) For the purposes of this Chapter, " opposite party ", means a party between whom and the party

interrogating an issue has been raised.

INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPERS LTD. v. GUNASINGHAM SLR 1991, Vol :1, : 285

WIJERATNE v. THE CHINA MUTUAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY

NLR Vol :22, : 43

GOONEWAEDHENA v. DUNUWILLE NLR Vol :46, : 565

SOBITHA UNNANSE v. PIYARATNA UNNANSE NLR Vol :60, : 189

CEYLON INSURANCE CO. LTD., v. R.M.SUDU BANDA, NLR Vol :69, : 261

CEYLON INSURANCE CO. LTD. v. SUDU BANDA NLR Vol :70, : 261

95. Service of interrogatories. 95. Interrogatories delivered under the last section shall be served on the registered attorney (if any) of the

party interrogated, or in the manner hereinbefore provided for the service of summons, and the provisions

herein contained with regard to service of summons shall, in the latter case, apply, so far as may be

practicable.

96. Cost of unreasonable interrogatories to be borne by party in fault. 96. The court, in adjusting the costs of the action, shall at the instance of any party, inquire, or cause

inquiry to be made, into the propriety of delivering such interrogatories; and if it thinks that such

interrogatories have been delivered unreasonably, exatiously, or at improper length, the costs occasioned

by the said interrogatories, and the answers thereto, shall be borne by the party in fault.

97. Interrogatories to company, & c. 97. If any party to an action is a body corporate or a company, whether incorporated or not, or any other

body of persons empowered by law to sue or be sued, whether in its own name or in the name of any

officer or other person, any opposite party may apply to the court for an order allowing him to deliver

interrogatories to any member or officer of such corporation, company, or body, and an order may be

made accordingly.

98. When party may refuse to answer. 98. Any party called upon to answer interrogatories, whether by himself or by any such member or officer,

may refuse to answer any interrogatory on the ground that it is scandalous or irrelevant, or is not put bona

fide for the purposes of the action, or that the answer will tend to criminate himself, or that the matter

inquired after is not sufficiently material at that stage of the action, or on any other like ground.








DEDIGAMA v DEDIGAMA AND ANOTHER SLR 2008, Vol :2, : 143

GOONEWAEDHENA v. DUNUWILLE NLR Vol :46, : 565



SENANAYAKE v. SENANAYAKE NLR Vol :74, : 564

99. To be answered by affidavit. 99. Interrogatories shall be answered by affidavit to be filed in court within ten days from the service

thereof, or within such further time as the court may allow.

PAR MARKETERS (PVT.) LTD V HATTON NATIONAL

BANK LTD

SLR 2004, Vol :3, : 297

BYRDE v. CARPEN CHETTY NLR Vol :12, : 114

100. Application for further answer. 100. If any person interrogated omits or refuses to answer or answers insufficiently any interrogatory, the

party interrogating may apply to the court for an order requiring him to answer or to answer further, as the

case may be. And an order may be made requiring him to answer or to answer further, either by an

affidavit or by viva voce examination, as the court may direct:

Provided that the court shall not require an answer to an interrogatory which in its opinion need not have

been answered under section 98.

NIHAL SRI AMERASEKERA v. GAMINI LAKSHMAN PEIRIS

SLR 2001, Vol :1, : 417

PAR MARKETERS (PVT.) LTD V HATTON NATIONAL BANK LTD

SLR 2004, Vol :3, : 297

THE FINANCE CO. LTD VS SRIYANI SLR 2006, Vol :3, : 248

NAMASIVAYAM CHETTY v. RAGSOOBHOY NLR Vol :46, : 12



AMIN JRAI v. M. M. HADJI OMAR & Co. LTD. NLR Vol :71, : 115


















101. Notice to admit genuineness of Documents 101.

(1) Either party may, by a notice issued by order of court, to be obtained on motion ex parte within a

reasonable time not less than ten days before the hearing, require the other party to admit (saving ail just

exceptions to the admissibility of such document in evidence) the genuineness of any document material to

the action.

(2) The admission shall also be made in writing, signed by the other party or his registered attorney, and

filed in court.

(3) If such notice be not given, no costs of proving such document shall be allowed, unless the court

otherwise orders.

(4) If such notice is not complied with within four days after its being served, and the court thinks it

reasonable that the admission should have been made, the party refusing shall bear the expense of proving

such document, whatever may be the result of the action.

102. Order for discovery of documents. 102.

(1) The court may, at any time during the pendency therein of any action, order any party to the action to

declare by affidavit all the documents which are or have been in his possession or power relating to any

matter in question in the action, and any party to the action may, at any time before the hearing, apply to

the court for a like order.

(2) Every affidavit made under this section shall specify which, if any, of the documents therein mentioned

the declarant objects to produce, together with the grounds of such objection.

GAMINI LAKSHMAN PEIRIS v. NIHAL SRI AMERASEKERA

SLR 1999, Vol :1, : 118

NIHAL SRI AMERASEKERA v. GAMINI LAKSHMAN PEIRIS

SLR 2001, Vol :1, : 417

RALPH MACDONALD & CO. v. THE COLOMBO HOTELS COMPANY

NLR Vol :19, : 109

WEERASURIYA v. CROOS NLR Vol :22, : 87










103. Order for order production of documents. 103. The court may, at any time during the pendency therein of any action, the production by any party

thereto or such of the documents in his possession or power relating to any matter in question in such

action or proceeding as the court thinks right; and the court may deal with such documents when produced

in such manner as appears just.

SUNDERAM v. GONSALVES NLR Vol :51, : 15


103 A State required to make discovery or give inspection of

documents under certain circumstances. [26,20 of 1977]

103A.

(1) In any action to which the State is a party, the State may also be required to make discovery or give

inspection of documents.

(2) The provisions of subsection (1) shall not prejudice the right of the State to withhold any document on

the ground that in the opinion of the Minister in charge of the subject to which the document relates, the

public interest would suffer by such disclosure.

104.Notice to produce documents for inspection. 104.

(1) Any party to an action may, at any time before or at the hearing thereof, by motion ex parte, obtain an

order of court for notice to issue to any other party in whose pleadings or affidavits reference is made to

any document, to produce such document for the inspection of the party giving such notice, or of his

registered attorney, and to permit such party or registered attorney to take copies thereof.

(2) No party failing to comply with such notice shall afterwards be at liberty to put any such document in

evidence on his behalf in such action, unless he satisfies the court that such document relates only to his

own title, or that he had some other and sufficient cause for not complying with such notice.

HYDER ALI v. RAJADURAI AND OTHERS SLR 1987, Vol :1, Page: 138

SHEILA SENEVIRATNE v. SHEREEN DHARMARATNE [CASE NO. 2] SLR 1998, Vol :1, Page: 383

GULAMHUSSEIN AND ANOTHER v. COHEN AND ANOTHER SLR 2002, Vol :2, Page: 328






SELAN BANK PLC vs SAMANELlYA TEAS (PRIVATE) LIMITED AND 3 OTHERS

SLR 2009, Vol :1, Page: 134

AMERASEKERA et al v. PALANIAPPA et al. NLR Vol :17, Page: 104

NANDAWATHIE DE SILVA v. YASAWATHIE DE SILVA NLR Vol :58, Page: 97

CEYLON INSURANCE CO. LTD. v. SUDU BANDA NLR Vol :70, Page: 261

End of part 2 - from Sections 41 to 104






786 cpc 41 to 104 part 2 pdf (3)

Law

service service

substituted service

service partners

personal service

rejection of plaint

plaint document

subscription of plaint

jurisdiction of court